VIC SECRET Stanley Meyers
This is gonna make you laugh because its so simple its ridiculous. I've always said to my good friend who I have spent years talking about this subject with, that if I ever drop on something then its going out into the big bad world right away and I'm gonna keep that promise.
Recently I've been going through schematics of Tesla and Meyer and I've been pondering this schematic of Meyer:
...and to be honest its been bugging me for months what the Unipolar magnetic field coupling is on that schematic. Now I went and got the Canadian patent and was still a little baffled by it all so I started to wonder about influencing flux paths in magnetic cores and who had experience in that field and it turned out a fellow by the name of Charles Flynn had patented several devices. Mainly, increases in voltage and co-efficiency were his game and it turned out that he used magnets to influence, cut off and re-route magnetic flux paths in transformers.Obviously Bi-toroid transformers try to achieve the same goal but instead of using magnets they work by a combination of increasing and decreasing the resistive path of magnetic flux in favour of over unity but with limitations.I have mentioned that I felt Meyer's work and Bi-Toroids have something in common in previous posts BTW and I have been working on that.So......here's the money shot, I got it in my head that Meyer was using magnets to influence his VIC and that his Unipolar magnetic field coupling was none other than a straight forward run of the mill bar magnet. I built a fully operational HHO front end about six months ago and had recently blown a NEC555 timer chip and two days since I replaced the chip with a new one. My front end device allows me to use any frequency from 0-20Khz using the NEC555 and then gate it with another PWM at anywhere between 0-13.8 vdc, which is connected to an optocoupler/transister configuration, that allows me up to 5 amps load without stressing the PWM's.So I strapped a bog standard step up transformer to my front end and a 12-18vdc heavy duty relay out the back of the transformer. I think the transformer is 1:4 in voltage but I wasn't sure so i kept the output pulses out of my front end wide apart and kept the output voltage of the transformer less than 18 vdc.Got a magnet and did what Flynn did.Holy crap! Thats all I can say. All I kept saying to myself was no no no no no no no no no no no it can't be that simple. But it is.No voltage increase but the amps more than halved as soon as I stuck it next to the iron core of the transformer. If you put it the other way so the poles are reversed on the magnet my power supply started buzzing, the amps doubled and the relay slowed down as if the EMF increased. There is no other explanation, the magnet only allows flux to travel in one direction depending on the way you place it on the core.You have to be careful because you can saturate the core so don't use massive magnets, start off with little ones till you reach probably 80% of the saturation point. Now, here's the important bit for all you Meyer fans: If you are using resonant coils then the Q factor is gonna be in orbit, the efficiency of this set up in resonant coils is going to go bananas without any shadow of a doubt. Anyway, did a search on You-tube and i'm not the first to suss this out, obviously Flynn did it but a young man demonstrates it quite well here:- if I can do what i did just messing about, imagine what you can do with magnets tuned to your transformer more efficiently? Imagine what the efficiency of resonant coils is going to be and the Q factor? Message to Stan Meyer God bless his soul: Unipolar magnetic field coupling? Thats the best description I've ever heard for a bar magnet, you crafty old devil.Crack on members, crack on.........the cats out the bag.
I've been looking at the implications of what this means to anyone building Bi-Toroid transformers and it is going to be good.
Not only do you cut the back EMF path off between the primary and the secondary it could also cut the back EMF between the the secondary and the 2nd secondary if you place another permanent magnet on that frame too which I'm not sure if it would be good or bad thing. People would have to experiment with that.
Lawrence Tseung, who worked on these type of transformers and with a standard Iron core transformer he achieved 50% more output power than the input power.
Thane Heins with his version of Bi-Toroid is claiming 2300% which is 23 times more power at the output than the input. If we transfer any of this technology either magnetic transformers or Bi-Toroid transformers to Meyer's Vic, then the resonant coils are going to have a field day with it.
Patent was 1986 and available here in the Canadian patents section:-
Read the patent very carefully. Meyer is claiming that he can influence the path of magnetic flux between a primary and secondary coil and that the primary has less turns than the secondary as in a conventional transformer per Se.
He claims in his 16 part patent that the flux field can be accelerated in one direction and that coils in the transformer can be made to except and reject flux paths because of their magnetic properties.
The Achilles heal of the VIC in past experiments by thousands of Meyer followers has always been the same problem. Regardless of whether you believe the plates are insulated on the WFC or not, the resonant charging chokes and the tank circuit they create always have a return path back to the primary and induce current from your power supply. In the case of uninsulated capacitor plates it produces nothing more than a one directional brute force current path across the cell. In the case of insulated plates in the WFC and the electric field created in such a process, there is still a return current path back to the primary and people cannot create the high voltage field in Meyer's other patents which is needed to pull the water molecule apart.
It's been tried too many times and failed and it was obvious to me as well as others that something was missing.
Here's an ace up the sleeve for all you Meyer followers, the path back to the primary whether you choose to apply brute force and use the plates as electrodes or whether you choose to use resonant coils in conjunction with a capacitor in the WFC with insulated plate surfaces, the ball has now appeared right in your court because we now have a way of cutting off the back EMF into the primary and the current loop is now finally closed.
This is why this discovery is so important and people must embrace this and pay attention to it. We cannot afford to keep making the same mistakes over and over again.
Thane Heins has patents and video's all over You tube explaining how to create Bi-Toroids that are 2300% efficient and explains how they are made and also explains how they work by influencing flux paths and shutting down the back EMF.
If you combine his knowledge and copy it onto Meyer's VIC then you have a ball game on your hands, you can also use Meyer's VIC with his tuned resonant chokes and in-cooperate the magnet system of Charles Flynn into to it with similar results.
Stan Meyer tried to hide the fact he was influencing flux paths by creating a sneaky Canadian patent called a Electrical particle generator and it took quite a while to suss out what he did. Why did he do it? Because you cannot patent a simple magnet.
This is probably going to be the most important Stan Meyer thread you'll ever read, cut and paste it to other websites as much as you can just in case this gets shut down.
Look at the schematic and Meyer's Unipolar magnetic field coupling. Look at the direction of the field created by it, its perpendicular to the flux direction. Forget how Meyer describes his resonant charging chokes, they are electromagnets to shut down back EMF and are marked as such on the schematic except in name.
Firstly, we now know that Meyer is using magnets to influence flux paths but the type of magnet and the way you manipulate it is very important.
His VIC is now much more simple to understand, A primary with an input of pulsed DC, a secondary and two electromagnets separated by the load. Nothing more, nothing less. The diode simply makes sure the electromagnets are polarized in the right direction to stop the back EMF. ITS THAT SIMPLE.
The frequency of the pulsed and gated DC and the voltage are only to time the actions of the electromagnets with the rest of the circuitry.
Forget the wording in which Stan Meyer describes his schematics, its all BS so he can register patents and lock down the designs, he couldn't patent electromagnets, he couldn't patent basic transformers either so he just makes silly names up for them all.
The electromagnets may well have resonance but they are still electromagnets.
Jesus you could even use your own electromagnets with their own power supply to remove back EMF in ANY transformer circuit and time them to the pulsed DC.
Oh and by the way, you will probably have problems with core saturation with the electromagnets so here's some advice: Use efficient core materials and provide a way of restricting the saturation such as a gating system on your pulse width
I wonder how many people have been building this schematic and saturating the core so it doesn't work? Everybody is my guess.
You can also control the flux saturation in the core by the resistive load across the two electromagnets and the windings on the them and so on. Notice he is monitoring the core and nothing else on that schematic. He's does that so he can monitor for over saturation of the core then link that to a phase lock loop which controls the pulse width and gating, lowering and increasing the PWM timing so he's just below saturation 100% of the time. It's absolutely ingenious.
So let me ask you nav, when Stan says he is reducing amps, that's only true on the input side correct? There is still plenty of amperage on the output side.
This all looks way too easy. Get yourself two C-cores, put the coils on there and begin working your way up with larger and larger bar magnets across the two sides until you hit a spot that's mostly in-tune with your load.
This looks a lot like Tom Bearden's MEG to me. If that's the case, you'll probably want to use a nano-crystalline core, though I suspect an Amorphous C-Core may also work.
Gonna start testing soon, but first you can do this a few ways. Firstly you can build a simple circuit like this with two bar magnets, a pulse width modulator and a primary and a secondary on a ferrite core with a resistive load.
Now if you do this you will need a variable resistive load marked R1. A and B are the electromagnets. I would start off small and work up with the windings. Follow Stan's schematic for coil winding direction to begin with and include the diode so the poles are correct on the magnets. Same with the primary marked 'p' and the secondary marked 's' don't be going heavy.
Primary and secondary don't want to be too big so I suggest we go for a step up of 3-1 with fine wire. We don't want to saturate the core with too powerful electromagnets. PWM needs to be monitored so connect oscilloscope to monitor frequency and pulse width. If we get too much saturation we can increase the time in between the pulse widths.
The resistive load will decompress the time intervals but the electromagnets cannot so don't worry about power going into the load. If the electromagnets are too powerful then you can increase the load at R1 too. Not bothering with fuel cells at this point because we need R1 to be as static as we can get it for testing purposes and a fuel cell will screw that up.
We need to connect an amp meter in between the power supply and the PWM to monitor current draw. Try to use ferrite not iron or any efficient core material that will not saturate easily.
Then we play.
It will take time and experimentation. Good luc